In case there was any doubt that Sean Hannity is one of the worst human beings alive

[yendi]

Turns out that Hannity's been ripping off the money donated to the troops for years.

Note that this is from Debbie Schlussel's site, not exactly a bastion of knee-jerk liberalism.

(And seriously, when Ollie North tells you to knock something off because it's kind of scummy, that's a really bad sign.)

Comments

[cucumberseed.livejournal.com]

The icon speaks for me.

[feste-sylvain.livejournal.com]

I've known that Hannity was irretrievable scum (as opposed to anything respectable like "loyal opposition") when Geraldo Rivera ripped him a new one, live on the air, for unethical story-spinning.

Yeah. Totally parallel to being smacked down by Ollie North.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Schlussel's facts don't pan out.

Please don't put any stock in her accusation. It does not seem to be true.

[siliconshaman.livejournal.com]

Yeah, really?! Evidence please...

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Google around, it's not too hard to find.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

But in case it IS too hard for you to find, here are a few links:

http://www.bucksright.com/schlussel-humiliates-self-with-baseless-hannity-smear-5409

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/03/19/schlussels-hannity-smear-debun

http://www.frumforum.com/hannitized-is-sanitized

These are from conservative sources (as is Schlussel's accusation), but they seem to have a pretty decent grasp on figuring out what the truth may be in this case.

There's no scandal there. Just an angry, crazy blogger.

[afeldspar.livejournal.com]

When I'm dealing with two sides who have opposing claims, and both sides are asserting that their claims can be supported by looking at primary sources, I tend to lean towards the side that tells me how to find the primary sources and away from the side that tells me ... how to find repetitions of the claims they've already made.

As an example of the latter, you provided three links which you implied would provide us with evidence. But the second link doesn't provide us with any evidence; all it does is link to the third.

Schussel, on the other hand, posted images of three years of Freedom Alliance's Form 990s. I checked one of the three and sure enough, the total revenues were listed as $10.8 million on line 12, but the only amounts that appeared to be paid charitably, on line 22b, totaled just $0.4 million. Barring the possibility that those Form 990s are forgeries (something that I admittedly would not rule out in general, not after the "yellowcake letter" incident and the "Kenyan birth certificate") it seems that Schlussel has supported the point that she made: the organization has taken in a lot of money, claiming that the money would go to injured soldiers and their families, but most of the money has gone to the organization and very little to the soldiers it was raised for.

Now, it's possible that someone could explain why the Form 990 is deceiving. For instance, your first link makes the claim "A lot of the money the Freedom Alliance has raised is still in a trust because the kids of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan aren't old enough to go to college and don’t need scholarships yet." This might go some way towards explaining the Form 990 ... if we believed that IRS regulations allow a charitable organization to place raised funds into a trust and not record that that's what they did with them. I have got to tell you, I believe that explanation so little that it doesn't rescue the credibility of Freedom Alliance in my eyes, it destroys that of "Bucks Right".

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Except we already know how many millions they've put in a scholarship fund, and we can check with the IRS to see if it's legal (hint: it is).

Question: where is the proof that Hannity used the charity's money (which, AFIAK, he doesn't have access to) on expensive transportation for himself?

This is one of Schlussel's prime claims, and the only reason anyone on the Right or the Left cares about this charity: it's a way to attack Hannity.

Except it's a fraudulent smear. Hannity has pretty odious ideas, but attacking a charity as a way of tearing down Hannity is wrong. Schlussel is a right-wing nut and smear merchant; don't buy what she's selling here.

[afeldspar.livejournal.com]

It's pretty hilarious that you say "Schlussel is a right-wing nut and smear merchant" - as if that differentiated her from Sean Hannity.

Do you have any proof for your claim that Freedom Alliance has put millions in a scholarship fund? I'm not a tax expert by any means, but since Schedule A, Part III, line 3a asks "Did the organization make grants for scholarships, fellowships, student loans, etc.?" it seems that such amounts would surely be listed on line 22b, and as previously noted, line 22b shows less than $0.4 million. And there seems to be little doubt that in each of the examined years, over half the money raised by the organization went to the organization itself.

I am not saying that Schlussel's charges are correct. But when one side is saying "Here are my charges, and here is the documentation to support my charges," and the other side is saying "Those charges are wrong, and here's some ad hominem against the person that brought them, and here's some rebuttals without any documentation to support them," it's the original side that looks more credible.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

And here's some (progressive) analyses of Schlussel's past statements:

http://mediamatters.org/search/tag/debbie_schlussel

[siliconshaman.livejournal.com]

Humph..wonder how much of those millions raised went into 'campaign contributions' for the Rethuglins.

Really, is there anybody left in the upper ranks of the Repugnants who isn't corrupt, dishonest, lying or outright sociopathic etc...

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Humph..wonder how much of those millions raised went into 'campaign contributions' for the Rethuglins.

Probably none of it.

[thegreatjohnzo.livejournal.com]

i have to imagine that if i were to ever meet hannity or glenn beck, my first response would be to swear at them, followed by me spitting on them. i have to wonder if that's other people's responses as well. o'reily i think i would just call a douchebag, but i'm not sure if i would spit on him or not, i don't know why. really, i'd have to actually meet him and see.

or hitting them with 2 by 4s. that would be sweet.